to think jackie powell is a STUPID woman

[somedayma]

who seems to have been sucked in by Ian Brady's 'charms'?

just watched the documentary on channel 4. she's so...defensive of Brady.

WHY on earth would you keep a letter in your possession that may reveal the body of one of the victims? WHY?

But lover who gets to decide who is entitled to an advocate and who is not?
You can't have a discretionary system.

I once met a man who was in the throes of serious mental breakdown and pushed a young woman under a tube. Her family think he is a monster. That he should receive the death penalty. That he should not be entitled to social justice.

Their reaction is of course understandable but quite quite wrong.

But in order for that person to have social justice, it has to be available to all. You can't hand it out to the favourites.

Going back to Gareth Peirce I suspect you would have been one of those berating her and shoving dog shit through her letterbox. She took a case on that many would have been sickened by.

If anyone genuinely believes the rule book should be thrown out of the window for certain people, then there's little point in them pursuing this discussion. They may as well continue to read the tabloids to feed their appetite

The fact is, human rights are afforded to all people, and any civilised society has to operate on that basis.

BTW, those of us who understand the role of advocacy are just as shocked, horrified and repulsed by Brady's crimes. Saying he should burn in hell or that the rule book should be thrown out of the window doesn't give anyone some sort of moral high ground. We all deplore his crimes just as much as you.

Oh the likes of Brady would love it if we lived without social justice. That would quite be his thing.

I'm sorry but when we are dealing with cold blooded rapists and child murderers the rule book should be thrown out of the window.

That is not what Brady is, he is Mentally Ill.

Who, professionally would WANT to represent and advocate for someone who has committed the crimes he has

Anyone passionate about the rights of Mentally Ill people.

If the public was fully informed about the crimes committed by people who are 'fully functioning' aginst children and adults, you would be quite horrified who is walking around in our society, tbh.

Most of the public live in blissful ignorance about what goes on in our society and why we have the laws that we now do.

The only person who could have put Winnie out of her misery was Ian Brady

Or Hindley, whose other visits to the Moors were blocked because of media and public feeling. I would hope that we look back and realise the mistakes came from politicians not wanting to take unpopular desicions and hope that this doesn't happen in the future.

We all deplore his crimes just as much as you.

We also, i would hope, deplore the lack of action (because of the lack of understanding and guidelines) taken when in every serial killers early days there has been indicators, in those both NT and having a mental disorder.

That is what is wanted, that those capable of moving on from gateway crimes, don't get to the level of sex offender or killer.

We can only get to that point if we understand and know why a series of events happen and the conditions allow for these tragedies to happen.

Birds
Fair point about Myra Hindley.

Picking up on wordfactory's comment. One of the reasons that society should give a damn about Ian Brady's rights is because to not do so potentially puts us on a slippery slope to becoming as amoral as he is.

I have never really understood why those who don't want social justice think they somehow care more.

It seems to me that they care very little.

I really dont want to think about all of this any more but in response to the poster who said that they thought it weird that JP was taking calls from Brady day and night and that her whole life seemed to be about it - isnt this just what was raised by the prison system about Brady - that he and his demands consumed more resources, attention and man hours than all of the other inmates put together. It becomes understandable then how much work JP would have to do.

I'm not willing to condemn her on the basis of a C4 documentary, when we know that the makers are paid to make controversial television!

"Ian Brady, psychopath, is manipulating professionals" is a brilliant angle to take. It's "vicious rottweiler attacks tot" kind of telly- it is what many viewers would expect to hear, and see. It's very easy to convince people of what they want to see.

Many people would revel in the opportunity to feel superior to a highly-educated woman carrying out a demanding, vocational job such as being a mental health advocate.

And I very, very, very much doubt that that letter actually contained information on the location of Keith Johnson's body. If Ian Brady even still remembers, there's a reason why he hasn't divulged it before. What would he manipulate people with, without it? The public might forget about him completely! No attention. No fan letters. He wouldn't be able to taunt with that information any more.

'I have never really understood why those who don't want social justice think they somehow care more.'

• I think it's because it's more comfortable and simpler to buy into the mob rule mentality, baying for blood and saying certain people don't deserve justice.

It's far harder to acknowledge that the crimes are horrendous but that any civilised society cannot dispense with the notion of justice and human rights.

I think it's entirely possible btw to feel those sentiments. If my child were tortured and murdered I would feel I would want to inflict the same thing on the perpetrator, and indeed I can feel it on behalf of the victims and their families. But it crosses a line when you actually believe that's what should happen in reality.

I do agree with that janey. If it was my child, I would probably imagine doing all kinds to the perpetrator but if I was given the chance to do so, I actually couldn't do it. And I couldn't sit back and watch someone else do it either because it isn't right, and that's what separates me from the perpetrators. Doing otherwise would be just as bad as what they did.

I do understand that they are entitled to, and should get, a fair trial, mental health advocate etc, I just wasn't aware that it was not usual for these MHAs to do it for free, so felt it seemed a bit fishy as to what JP was playing at. Good luck to them though, as I couldn't do it.

Not unusual I meant.

Without being flippant, the situation janey and kabooooom are discussing reminds me of a scene in The West Wing when they are preparing the President for a Live TV debate. Toby's last sentence sums it up pretty well.

TOBY
Mr. President, this next question is on capital punishment, which you oppose:
If your youngest daughter Zoey was raped and murdered, would you not want to see the man responsible put to death?

BARTLET
First of all, it's important to understand the President doesn't make that
decision, though he appoints the Supreme Court Justices who do
so. What... any... um... All right, I'm not going to say that. I'll just go right to... No, I don't. I think you know that I'm opposed.... [sighs] Let's not do that. I haven't seen any evidence that it's a deterrent, and there are more effective... In my state...

TOBY
What's the matter with you? I just mentioned your daughter being murdered, and you're giving us an answer that's not only soporific, it's barely human! Yes, you'd want to see him put to death. You'd want it to be cruel and unusual, which is why it's probably a good idea that fathers of murder victims don't have legal rights in these situations.

This woman is not a mental health advocate, she is not working to professional standards if she was she has broken every rule in the book!
A Mental Health Advocate role is to ensure someone has the rights they have under the MHA upheld, simple as that. This woman was working independently and was not employed by the provider at the hospital. No advocate would act as Power of Attorney or Executor of a Will, and she completely broke the rules by removing letters - nothing is allowed off high secure wards.
I have met Brady, he is manipulative and evil but charming and engaging - how on earth the hospital allowed this woman to work as his 'advocate' for so long (MH advocacy is primarily issue based, it's different to other forms such as mentioned above) is beyond me, given what a manipulative character he is.
Oh and MH advocates do not work for free - JP may have been but she is not an advocate

She is described as his former MH advocate, so her role has changed.

I know this is going to be a thread on which feelings run high, but there's no need to assume that any poster questioning the way Jackie Powell's role has worked is automatically a 'string-em-up' type who wants Brady's human rights removed. I understand and accept that human rights have to be universally granted. Nevertheless there is still room to question exactly what has gone on in this case.

Birdsgottafly I take your point that open discussion of the role of an advocate for Brady might not be popular - however, not discussing that role seems to have lead just as easily to hostility, so I think at least trying to explain it (not saying that's your job!) would have some value.

As it was, exactly what she did was very unclear. I would still like to know this and only zubin has had a go at it here so far. I would imagine they speak up for the rights of the patient in general terms, but what else? Would a mental health advocate aim to argue that their patient was not mentally ill, and should not be sectioned? so, in other words, was Jackie Powell assisting Brady in putting his tribunal case together, or was she just observing to make sure he was properly cared for while a psychiatric patient? Was she supposed to be befriending him and relating to him as a person?

wordfactory - are you saying you have personal knowledge that Jackie Powell talked about her role but it was cut, or that you believe that to be the case (on the basis of knowledge of the industry etc)?

The advocate would represent the views of the patient if they were unable to do so themselves - unlikely to be the case in this particular situation. The advocate doesn't form a view of the person at all, they are purely there to support - she could help him prepare his case for tribunal, largely in the context of his rights and helping him prepare what he wanted to say at the meeting - naturally advocates do 'judge' but their judgement doesn't come into the role, they are purely there to ensure the person's 'voice is heard and their rights under the MHA are respected'. So if a person is supposed to get leave (not in this case clearly but an example) an advocate could help a person challenge that with ward staff as it goes against their rights.
An advocate doesn't befriend or relate to someone as a person, she kind of touched on this in the programme, but then completely went against her own words with her actions. IMHA (Independent mental health advocacy) is a statutory service and people under a section are legally entitled to support, however it is very procedural, much more so than any other forms of advocacy, there is clear guidance and a code that IMHA's work to, possibly would be worth JP rereading the code!!
I guess she must have, at some point, have been acting as an advocate she certainly isn't now

Eighties
I don't think anyone is assuming that people questioning JP's role are "string-em-up" types. I think we were reacting to the specific comments about "the rule book going out of the window" for some types of criminals.

There is a difference in questioning the role of JP plays / has played and the general right for someone to have a MHA. No matter how vile I might think Brady is, if it is determined that he has a statutory right to a MHA to assist in protecting his interests, then he should have one.

What puzzles me is, if JP is not his MHA, in what capacity is she visiting him and who is permitting it. She can't just pop in and see him because she feels like it.

We don't know how the editing of the programme was done.

She has spoken about her role now and not speaking to Brady about his crimes, as that is not what she is there for and them being of no interest to her, which i think is the part that people take to mean that she is not disturbed that someone is capable of those acts.

JP has two children and will no doubt be as affected, the details of the murders as anyone, the difference is that when Brady is sat in front of her, that is not what her focus is,at all, his crimes are forgotten.

She struck me as a very useful idiot.

Regardless of what people think of her, i don't think that she deserves the abuse that apparantely is preventing her and her children from returning home.

The neighbours are reporting constant disturbances outside, people are coming onto her estate to shout abuse at the house.

Having this article in The Telegraph it would appear that her only status is as a 'Visitor'.

Quite shocked that someone is permitted access but no one can say exactly what her role or purpose is.

Ian Brady is a highly intelligent psychopath.

Psychopaths play people.

You CANNOT outplay (manipulate) a psychopath.
(Martha Stout PhD)

So if she had some misguided loyalty toward him, she was perhaps mistaken. But, do you know what? He was playing anyway.

Birdsgottafly, reading your last post about her not being able to return home with her children has made me sad. No matter what people feel, they should never act in such a way especially when it involves innocent children

Fascinating thread. Will return later.